sk7326
-
Posts
7,647 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by sk7326
-
Agree with all of this - but nothing wrong with trading opportunistically. The younger guys have a better chance of giving this team a chance to contend THIS year than what they let go.
-
AJ is dumped - good. Trade: Peavy, Buchholz any reliever not nailed to the ground. Keep: Lester, Ortiz, Napoli, Pedroia, kiddos
-
I am glad the Red Sox knew what the word "sunk cost" means. The money was eaten when the signature was put on the contract. If he is not worth a roster spot, why fake it? Vasquez was clearly the best option on the farm - a guy with his defensive skills can manage to add value even if he is not an improvement over AJ offensively. I doubt anybody was going to trade anything of value for AJ ... he will land somewhere, he is a useful backup. The bad news is Boston burned 2-3 months wasting development reps on low-value veterans in key starting spots. The good news is they corrected both mistakes decisively. Trading Peavy is an obvious next move. Trading everybody in the pen, Uehara included - also has to be investigated, if we are going to midwife a real youth movement.
-
I know about the curse and lived 18 years of that. But the beauty of 2004 is that we could stop thinking in terms of it. For me, seeing 3 titles in the 10 years after Aaron Boone ... I can die in peace regardless of the 2014 season. No team has been more successful in this century than we have - this season has just been a lot of poor luck as much as anything. I have zero patience (since I lived through the Butch Hobson years, and Buckner and Boone) for whining about 2011 or 2012 ... at least in a sense of "suffering" ... I know suffering, this is certainly not it.
-
that is reasonable. I do think if the team shows it is not willing to pay top dollar for top talent, the fanbase will be onto them.
-
5 for 76 is rough - so the question becomes if you are a believer that it will get better. I always look at how overmatched Trot Nixon and Pedroia were at various points. Things will improve.
-
The dumpster fires in the OF and at C have been much more problematic than SS. Bogaerts is struggling, but he was bound to hit a rough patch. He'll be fine unless he is not the prospect we think he is. Farrell's job is to find wins here - this isn't a rebuild. Good teams get production from the corner spots - the Sox being a whole hog disaster in 3 of the 4 corner positions (aside from a Holt BABIP flash) has been the story. Everything else is distraction.
-
Since punting 2 years of World Series goodwill is desirable. They still have business to attend to this year - the season has been rough, but the AL has been mediocre outside of 2 teams. I think if this is a 90 loss team you will see some substantial changes and veteran signs. When you gouge your fanbase like the Sox do - it is the least you can do. Prospects will be added smartly - like they have this season. The story of their season is about basically 15 wins of production being (Ellsbury, Victorino, Salty) being replaced by bubkus (Bradley, Pierzynski, misc chum in RF). I think promoting Vasquez to start makes sense - he might be worse than AJ offensively but he at least provides a dimension at a serious restaurant quality level. Betts has so much promise that he could help with the outfield thing. The run prevention has largely been good - the question is whether you think they can realistically catch the teams in front of them. The East is a crapshoot - and so there is some merit in continuing to chase.
-
He has had a solid season - just working through things now. You are smart to exercise patience. His pattern has been to start slow but figure things out at each level. Just remember how young he is.
-
He IS protecting his prospect - by continuing to play him. X will only learn how to deal with a slump by dealing with a slump. His season is completely in line with lots of pretty good 21 year old SS/3B sorts. I don't envy Farrell's job here - since there are games to win at the same time. But you keep playing him and count on him figuring things out.
-
Given the odd penny pinching this offseason - it is hard to say Hank's goals relative to George's as far as going balls to the wall here. Their offseason spending this year didn't make any sense baseballwise aside from Tanaka.
-
It was a 3-way deal - the cost in the system can be evaluated as Garcia or Iglesias equally validly. Olt had fallen on hard times in the Rangers system (blocked by a HoF'er, struggling) - he was an upside play, but a damaged one. If you think 12 starts of Jon Lester nets a Mookie Betts/Henry Owens equivalent, that is terribly unlikely. I agree in isolation with the analysis about going years with a 30 year old. But you also have to look at each investment individually - and Lester has been one of the surest things in baseball since he came of age in 2008. There is a very low chance of the contract being a failure - because he will still be capable of giving 30 reasonably good starts in 4-5 years most likely. Paying a #3/4 starter $20 million will prevent John Henry from acquiring another striker on the July transfer market - but overall the deal will be a net plus.
-
Iglesias. So a one dimensional - probable non-All Star starter. Which is a solid return. But that was for a year plus of control for Peavy. Lester you are trading him for a dozen starts maybe ... that is a much different return. The White Sox traded Peavy with another year of control at an "above average innings eater" sort of salary aside from an option he was never going to trigger and got back a fringy starter. I think teams are smarter now. You can get a larger return on Lester yes - but the window to make THAT trade has passed. When you are selling an extra month of control and whatnot. I see guys on the board bleating that Lester is not as good as Kershaw, Scherzer whatever. But who cares - even if you think Lester is more of a #2 than a true #1 (and I am going by evaluation parlance - #1 means top ten or so starters in the league) - you CANNOT navigate a 162 game season without guys like him. As fun as it is to say that "you need an ace to win, now get off of my lawn" - that is just not true. Hell, we saw it last season.
-
They have never not had the money. The 2012 trade allowed them to move diminishing assets. They could whine about budgetary limitations, but the limitations are ones they set. This is not an argument for them being stupid - but it is to point out it is a constraint that does not exist to the degree they claim.
-
I think their definition of fair could be different than ours. The ownership are not afraid to pay on one hand, but they are pretty hawkish (and always have been) on player compensation. The leverage of the trade is a little silly - since nobody is going to offer a reasonable return without some sort of confidence Lester would resign. So yes, if there is leverage in the "well if he doesn't sign we can trade him to Milwaukee for a bag of donuts" - that is leverage. But from a practical scenario the player has much more say. That said, if the Red Sox re-sign Lester, it will effectively be a "last contract" - since Lester's 10/5 rights will kick in.
-
Agreed. The 2011-2012 experience did not mean that spending money is a bad idea. It just means that mistakes suck (and injuries suck). If this teams whines about cost like they are the Rays, it is quite distasteful. I think Lester gets done ultimately - he is a hard commodity to replace.
-
So would lots of teams, but who cares. Lester is still tremendously valuable - so is Lackey. 200 IP of quality is worth paying for. And the Sox aren't poor - for the price they charge, it's not an either/or thing.
-
Clearly nobody goes on slumps ...
-
Easy enough to undo - let's see what happens. 6 games back - the run prevention has been largely good. Lot of bad luck so far. There is hope.
-
Relying on memory of Yankees gone by isn't really measurement. Bradley has struggled - of that there is no dispute. Betts could take his job - and that could be interesting. The Sox have not done enough offensively ... still producing baserunners, but knocking them in. Bradley has been a problem - but he is at least creating value on the run prevention side. The corner outfield spots have not offered that.
-
6 WHOLE YEARS!!!! The horror!!!
-
Hard to talk about fast in terms of baserunning since there is not much way to measure it ... neither stole bases, and Bradley is a better defensive CF than Williams showed at any time in his career. But the speed showed in the non-SB places. Clearly Williams had an excellent offensive trajectory, one Bradley has not gotten to. The rookie comps are interesting though it is instructive to note that Williams' PAs mostly came at once on a team committed to the philosophy. Bradley has been yo-yo'd a bit by a front office that responded to WEEI callers and brought him to the show on little but a spring. I am not giving up on Bradley - different than predicting great things, but Victorino's absence and the general LF suckitude have been every bit as bad a problem. Bradley is at least adding value on one side of the ball while the other side gets figured out.
-
When you win a title - the right to complain the next season is very very low. This has not been a Marlins fire sale - just some crappy fortune and a little front office hubris.
-
More like a poor man's Williams without the same power level. But the rest of it? On base guys who have speed but only manifests itself in defensive range, not base stealing. It's not a perfect comp, but more of a point to stop whining about stolen bases.
-
I believe in the mental part of the game - I also believe that this is the hardest level of baseball on earth, and if the concerns of the levels of baseball we are experienced in have not been conquered, those dudes would not be there. The road from instructs to bigs is so difficult that the "devastation" you refer to would have crushed these guys way before the show. Has been a rough season - a lot of negation of the good fortune of last year (especially Victorino). Between Middlebrooks who would I bet on? Oh, Bradley - premium position and better approach. But Middlebrooks has at least some time in his couple of seasons where he has been good - so there is more past performance to dream on.